Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
(as demonstrated in the entire prequels)

And this is why you fail. The prequels are awful and no one should have to watch them. I suppose they could be used for torture or induce vomiting.

I agree 100%, but they still exist... Without the prequels the whole thing could make sense.

I'd be lying if I said I hadn't enjoyed Star Wars films/books/games over the years, but I've always felt uneasy about the rampant commercial machine behind it.

And it's gotten a whole lot worse since Disney took over.

I've been bombarded with trailers, ticket info, and hype left right, and centre.

I do worry about the future of culture - literature, books, film etc

because mass commercialisation always leads to mediocrity...

And I remember the mood pre Phantom Menace as well

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I'd be lying if I said I hadn't enjoyed Star Wars films/books/games over the years, but I've always felt uneasy about the rampant commercial machine behind it.

And it's gotten a whole lot worse since Disney took over.

I've been bombarded with trailers, ticket info, and hype left right, and centre.

I do worry about the future of culture - literature, books, film etc

because mass commercialisation always leads to mediocrity...

And I remember the mood pre Phantom Menace as well

You do realize that Kenner sold empty boxes to kids for Christmas in 1977, right? Not to mention the fact that George Lucas agreed to be paid only $150000 to direct Star Wars (even though American Graffiti was a critical success and he could have commanded a higher salary) so he could retain the merchandising rights for the would-be franchise.

So to complain about the "rampant commercial machine" behind the Star Wars franchise is to ignore the entire history of it.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I'd be lying if I said I hadn't enjoyed Star Wars films/books/games over the years, but I've always felt uneasy about the rampant commercial machine behind it.

And it's gotten a whole lot worse since Disney took over.

I've been bombarded with trailers, ticket info, and hype left right, and centre.

I do worry about the future of culture - literature, books, film etc

because mass commercialisation always leads to mediocrity...

And I remember the mood pre Phantom Menace as well

You do realize that Kenner sold empty boxes to kids for Christmas in 1977, right? Not to mention the fact that George Lucas agreed to be paid only $150000 to direct Star Wars (even though American Graffiti was a critical success and he could have commanded a higher salary) so he could retain the merchandising rights for the would-be franchise.

So to complain about the "rampant commercial machine" behind the Star Wars franchise is to ignore the entire history of it.

I am aware, and if there's an excuse to bash George Lucas, I'll take it!

This is a man that gave us Jar Jar Binks.

This is a man who didn't want Harrison Ford to be Indiana Jones.

This is a man who turned down Spielberg's offer to direct one of the SW's prequels,

and this a man who shared a taxi with Ridley Scott in London and didn't pay his share of the bill!

Don't get me started on George Lucas!

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/10/21/could-poe-dameron-be-a-child-of-the-force-star-wars-shattered-empire-spoilers/


..hmm.


Did not know about the tree thing at all.

These comics are in canon BTW

Looks good. Can't wait. I has the tickets for opening weekend (Saturday).

Also, JJ Abrams Star Trek is just fine. Want to watch some gakky movies? Watch Star Trek 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Dreadful.

 reds8n wrote:
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/10/21/could-poe-dameron-be-a-child-of-the-force-star-wars-shattered-empire-spoilers/


..hmm.


Did not know about the tree thing at all.

These comics are in canon BTW

That's very interesting. We know he's an ace pilot, which Force-sensitive folks tend to be because of their combat reflexes/prescience.

We can also take this another step. There's no guarantee that Dameron comes down on the Light Side. Note the beats in the trailer during Han's voiceover..."the Dark Side" (camera on Dameron)..."the Jedi" (camera on Finn). If this happens, there'd be an interesting balance (of the Force?) at work -- Finn a Stormtrooper that goes to the Resistance and Light Side, Dameron a Resistance member who goes to the First Order and the Dark Side.

We also see Dameron captured, and presumably with Kylo Ren. What if that's not just an interrogation going on, but an attempt to lead him to the Dark Side? Could Dameron -- and not Kylo Ren -- be the heavy in these films going forward? Might Kylo Ren be turned? Again, my gut tells me we're in for a few more twists than we've seen in other SW films.

 kronk wrote:
Also, JJ Abrams Star Trek is just fine. Want to watch some gakky movies? Watch Star Trek 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Dreadful.

I'd throw TNG films other than First Contact onto that pile too, and easily rate them below 3 and 4...probably below 6 also.

Abrams (finally) got the adventure back into ST. Before Abrams, that franchise had become remarkably tired and calcified, seeking only the safe and familiar.

Agreed.

JJ Abrams is the most awesome thing to happen since 37D of 9.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
"Puny God" wasn't the funny part.

In your opinion maybe, because I found it to be quite funny.

Its funny, but not as funny as Loki getting cut off mid-sentence.

 kronk wrote:
Looks good. Can't wait. I has the tickets for opening weekend (Saturday).

Also, JJ Abrams Star Trek is just fine. Want to watch some gakky movies? Watch Star Trek 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Dreadful.

The Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country are 'dreadful'? That's not a seriously considered opinion.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Looks good. Can't wait. I has the tickets for opening weekend (Saturday).

Also, JJ Abrams Star Trek is just fine. Want to watch some gakky movies? Watch Star Trek 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Dreadful.

The Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country are 'dreadful'? That's not a seriously considered opinion.

Among 12-year-olds and retirement communities, perhaps not. Elsewhere, those were horrible movies.

'What does God need with a starship?"

"Bring back 2 whales from the past or the super evil alien skull fethers will kill everyone!"

Excellent movies, indeed.

I'm with Kronk. Wrath of Khan? Amazing. Generations? Lots of fun. First contact? Really good. Meh on the rest of the movies. The shows were good. Movies stunk. Abrams movies beat most of the classic movies with a chainsword.

Must be a youth thing. He destroyed the ST universe with those crappy movies. Just hoping he doesn't kill Star Wars the same way. Yes not all of the original ST movies and NG for that matter were great, but they were thoughtful and fun for the most part, ok Undiscovered country and that God one were bad, not as bad as JJ's ST reboot, but still pretty bad. "KHAAAANNNNN!"- Capt Kirk(not Spock)

Well the reason the ST movies weren't great is because they totally clashed with the subject material. He tried to make an action movie out of space opera. Star Wars on the other hand is totally an action genre, so his style of film making will work.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well the reason the ST movies weren't great is because they totally clashed with the subject material. He tried to make an action movie out of space opera. Star Wars on the other hand is totally an action genre, so his style of film making will work.

Star Wars is a space opera, not Star Trek. I mean, Star Wars pretty much set the modern standard for what a space opera/science fantasy should be.

Maybe Space Soap Opera is what I'm looking for here. Point being, Action movie works in Star Wars. It doesn't with Star Trek.

Col. Dash wrote:
Must be a youth thing. He destroyed the ST universe with those crappy movies. Just hoping he doesn't kill Star Wars the same way. Yes, not all of the original ST movies and NG for that matter were great, but they were thoughtful and fun for the most part, ok Undiscovered country and that God one were bad, not as bad as JJ's ST reboot, but still pretty bad. "KHAAAANNNNN!"- Capt Kirk(not Spock)

Undiscovered Country was awesome. Final Frontier is dreadful as is Nemesis and Insurrection.
Anyways I remain skeptical at best with Force Awakens. It feels like it's going to have all this hype then, like a slowly deflating balloon, underwhelm massively rather than finish with a bang.

I'm trying to remember a Star Trek movie that didn't have a photon torpedo that hit the ship and sent people flying in some form of action sequence. Oh, right. There isn't one. ST 3: the death of Kirk's son. Generations: fist fights. The old show: fist fights and a ripped shirt for Kirk in every episode. There. Was. Action. You can't blame Abrams for putting action into a science fiction action movie. Regardless of what you want to remember the old ST films as, they were science fiction and always had action in them. Find me a ST movie that had no explosions from photon torpedoes in it, and I'll admit I was wrong.

A Star Trek movie can be bad, but still be a Star Trek movie.

Into Darkness was a good movie. But it wasn't a Star Trek movie. It was a movie which happened to have Star Trek characters and props, but it didn't feel like the Star Trek setting or have the same feel to the story.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I'm trying to remember a Star Trek movie that didn't have a photon torpedo that hit the ship and sent people flying in some form of action sequence. Oh, right. There isn't one. ST 3: the death of Kirk's son. Generations: fist fights. The old show: fist fights and a ripped shirt for Kirk in every episode. There. Was. Action. You can't blame Abrams for putting action into a science fiction action movie. Regardless of what you want to remember the old ST films as, they were science fiction and always had action in them. Find me a ST movie that had no explosions from photon torpedoes in it, and I'll admit I was wrong.

Yep. Consider Wrath of Khan; First Contact; most of the Borg stuff from TNG; Arena, Balance of Terror, The Doomsday Machine, and others from TOS.

We can get into a debate about the definition of the phrase "action movie," but there's always been plenty of action in ST.

Thats not action, its too stylized and scripted to be considered action.

Unless you'd consider a staged sword fight in a Shakespearean play to be enough to be considered Action.

 kronk wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:


The Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country are 'dreadful'? That's not a seriously considered opinion.

Among 12-year-olds and retirement communities, perhaps not. Elsewhere, those were horrible movies.

'What does God need with a starship?"

"Bring back 2 whales from the past or the super evil alien skull fethers will kill everyone!"

Excellent movies, indeed.

You've mixed up your Star Trek movies. The "starship" line ain't from The Undiscovered Country. That was "Only Nixon could go to China".

So action taking place in a Star Trek movie isn't real action. Ok. Glad we covered that. Back to Star Wars.

Can't wait for this movie, really happy Abrams is doing it because I like his other Sci-fi work. Can't wait to see it 3 times in theaters (roommates, family, other non-roommate friends).

 Grey Templar wrote:
A Star Trek movie can be bad, but still be a Star Trek movie.

Into Darkness was a good movie. But it wasn't a Star Trek movie. It was a movie which happened to have Star Trek characters and props, but it didn't feel like the Star Trek setting or have the same feel to the story.

Guys im scared, Me an Grey Templar are agreeing.
In Star Trek, action happens when something fails. and typically at the climax of the episode, where it is built up. very rarely in the first half will they. Action is a consequence in star trek, it has a place, it isnt action for the sake of action.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:


The Voyage Home and the Undiscovered Country are 'dreadful'? That's not a seriously considered opinion.

Among 12-year-olds and retirement communities, perhaps not. Elsewhere, those were horrible movies.

'What does God need with a starship?"

"Bring back 2 whales from the past or the super evil alien skull fethers will kill everyone!"

Excellent movies, indeed.

You've mixed up your Star Trek movies. The "starship" line ain't from The Undiscovered Country. That was "Only Nixon could go to China".

Maybe, but they were all so bad (other than Khan), does it really matter?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So action taking place in a Star Trek movie isn't real action. Ok. Glad we covered that. Back to Star Wars.

Can't wait for this movie, really happy Abrams is doing it because I like his other Sci-fi work. Can't wait to see it 3 times in theaters (roommates, family, other non-roommate friends).

That got me thinking.

I'm old enough to remember a time when "How many times have you seen Star Wars?" was a greeting, not a question. And one that would be met with a double-digit answer.

You whippersnappers and your VHS rentals and such. Back in the day we had to actually go to the theater to see movies over and over again.

 kronk wrote:
Maybe, but they were all so bad (other than Khan), does it really matter?

The Voyage Home goes for laughs more than others, but it's a good film. The Undiscovered Country is pretty solid, too. Even The Search for Spock is watchable, although really only as the interlude between 2 and 4.

The Motion Picture, The Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis are all rotten, though. All worse than the two most recent outings.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Maybe, but they were all so bad (other than Khan), does it really matter?

The Voyage Home goes for laughs more than others, but it's a good film. The Undiscovered Country is pretty solid, too. Even The Search for Spock is watchable, although really only as the interlude between 2 and 4.

The Motion Picture, The Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis are all rotten, though. All worse than the two most recent outings.

I enjoyed them as a kid. Now, looking at what Star Trek was versus what it is, I prefer the new stuff by quite a lot.

 gorgon wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So action taking place in a Star Trek movie isn't real action. Ok. Glad we covered that. Back to Star Wars.

Can't wait for this movie, really happy Abrams is doing it because I like his other Sci-fi work. Can't wait to see it 3 times in theaters (roommates, family, other non-roommate friends).

That got me thinking.

I'm old enough to remember a time when "How many times have you seen Star Wars?" was a greeting, not a question. And one that would be met with a double-digit answer.

You whippersnappers and your VHS rentals and such. Back in the day we had to actually go to the theater to see movies over and over again.

What is VHS? Is that some kind of DVD or something?

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So action taking place in a Star Trek movie isn't real action. Ok. Glad we covered that. Back to Star Wars.

Can't wait for this movie, really happy Abrams is doing it because I like his other Sci-fi work. Can't wait to see it 3 times in theaters (roommates, family, other non-roommate friends).

That got me thinking.

I'm old enough to remember a time when "How many times have you seen Star Wars?" was a greeting, not a question. And one that would be met with a double-digit answer.

You whippersnappers and your VHS rentals and such. Back in the day we had to actually go to the theater to see movies over and over again.

What is VHS? Is that some kind of DVD or something?

An inferior technology to Betamax, that's what it is.